Welcome to TypologyCentral

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

I've actually noticed plenty of amicable Fi/Fe discussions here and elsewhere in recent months. The problem isn't that some people are bigoted so much that some people are very reactive, for whom saying something even mildly critical results in overreactions and insults being hurled. And then there were those who thought it was fun to provoke the reactive people and then duck out of the way and watch the "fun".

On this forum, I believe changes in moderation policies a couple years ago gradually resulted both directly and indirectly in the reactive people and those who purposefully provoked them leaving.

An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

I've actually noticed plenty of amicable Fi/Fe discussions here and elsewhere in recent months. The problem isn't that some people are bigoted so much that some people are very reactive, for whom saying something even mildly critical results in overreactions and insults being hurled. And then there were those who thought it was fun to provoke the reactive people and then duck out of the way and watch the "fun".

On this forum, I believe changes in moderation policies a couple years ago gradually resulted both directly and indirectly in the reactive people and those who purposefully provoked them leaving.

I agree with that. It's impossible to have an honest discussion about a topic when people demand something other than your honest opinion. I'd rather sidestep the issue altogether.

Winterman is coming through the forest down to his Chrimbus cave inside the woods. Now's the time to tell him everything you want inside your Chrimbus bush!

Two SJs on staff completely ruins the otherwise pristine N modbox dynamic that would lead to further development of typology as a science. Got it.

Well there are more than two but they either aren't aware of it or are uninterested in changing their type after having it set a certain way for a long while.

The thing about typology is that it is a very very personal science by its very nature (the most, perhaps?) and the typical human acquiescence that exists towards SJ-style authority simply doesn't allow such discussion to exist even in a format like this since it is by its very nature overtly imprudently critical, and in many cases outright antisocial, delving down into dark rabbit-holes of human nature better left covered in almost every single normal social setting and institution. Having the same SJ style authority pyramid streamlines the way people think into a much more... while perhaps efficient in its own methods and results, does not actually do anything to further the discussion of typology in any critical or useful manner. People's willing social deference to this authority ruins and degrades the quality of the input they may have contributed in a more open setting.

The thing about typology is that it is a very very personal science by its very nature (the most, perhaps?) and the typical human acquiescence that exists towards SJ-style authority simply doesn't allow such discussion to exist even in a format like this since it is by its very nature overtly imprudently critical, and in many cases outright antisocial, delving down into dark rabbit-holes of human nature better left covered in almost every single normal social setting and institution. Having the same SJ style authority pyramid streamlines the way people think into a much more... while perhaps efficient in its own methods and results, does not actually do anything to further the discussion of typology in any critical or useful manner. People's willing social deference to this authority ruins and degrades the quality of the input they may have contributed in a more open setting.

What sort of type would you prefer enter the modbox? I'd be curious about what the forum might look like under an ENFJ or an ENTJ.

Winterman is coming through the forest down to his Chrimbus cave inside the woods. Now's the time to tell him everything you want inside your Chrimbus bush!

Well there are more than two but they either aren't aware of it or are uninterested in changing their type after having it set a certain way for a long while.

So, wait. You assert that there must be rogue SJ agents in the modstaff because the environment around here is SJ? Fine. I'd suggest calling some of them out over in the "Mistyped TypoC members" thread; you'd be doing us all a favor by rooting them out.

The thing about typology is that it is a very very personal science by its very nature (the most, perhaps?) and the typical human acquiescence that exists towards SJ-style authority simply doesn't allow such discussion to exist even in a format like this since it is by its very nature overtly imprudently critical, and in many cases outright antisocial, delving down into dark rabbit-holes of human nature better left uncovered in almost every single normal social setting and institution. Having the same SJ style authority pyramid streamlines the way people think into a much more... while perhaps efficient in its own methods and results, does not actually do anything to further the discussion of typology in any critical or useful manner. People's willing social deference to this authority ruins and degrades the quality of the input they may have contributed in a more open setting.

If this is the case.. wouldn't it be in their best interests to want to shut down this discussion? Either way on that one, wouldn't they shut it down because a they don't want a "discussion to exist even in a format like this" -- one that "SJ-style authority simply doesn't allow"?

For shits and giggles, I'll posit that it's Te that's to blame. Y'know, an orientation of thought where external facts and figures shape one's judgments? It creates an environment that fosters conformity of thought (Te) and quashes independent thinking (Ti). Moreover, Te lends itself very well to the creation of an org chart. You ever seen one of those things? Pyramid-shaped as all hell, with the major players on the top dangling the strings of the masses below.

What sort of type would you prefer enter the modbox? I'd be curious about what the forum might look like under an ENFJ or an ENTJ.

Any type that doesn't care as much about the minutia of the every day goings on in every single thread as SJ's do. An ENTJ or an ENFJ would be quite interesting to observe in a position of power in a place like this, although it would take a very particular person indeed, as these two types are renown for having some pretty strong biases of their own. Making it about type in the first place was a mistake, I made that original comment flippantly, although I stand by my last post.